Death penalty is too easy for them. I'd rather subject them to solitude and Yoko Ono CD's for the rest of their natural life.

 

Wow... I could be wrong being that I am atheist but doesn't the new testament feature a "turn the other cheek" attitude? Interesting...

 

i use to work at a used clothing place a while ago. there was a whacked out crazy guy who would come in, buy some fashion magazines and a young girl's pair of underwear for $.29 nearly everyday.

not doing anything wrong on the surface, but i'd say he needed to be put down like a dog. i just imagine a guy like that, would become a pedo if the opprotunity arose.

 

Ewww... fashion magazines!?

 

While we are on the subject, the bible also says: But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, branding for branding, wound for wound, blow for blow.

Exodus 21:23-25

But like you said, Matthew 5:39 is just as appropiate.

Thats why we let God sort em out.

 

It also says something about eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. And yes, I realize two things: a) we'd all end up blind and toothless if we followed it to a tee, and b) ya mean the Bible is contradicting itself? Noooo, really?


I'm with Dave, that guy just plain needs to be taken off this planet.

 

eye for an eye is "old testament". So unless you guys are Jewish... Nice try.

 

Yeah, Uh, I read the entire bible. Not just Old testament. See, real christians read the whole thing. Not just bits and pieces of what you want.

 

Whether you read it or not is irrelevant because it is my understanding that "real christians" (dam arrogant of you) have scrapped the old testament for the new. That being the case "eye for an eye" is no longer the "Christian" way.

 

Once again, you consider all christian religions to be guilty of the same thing eh? Didn't we touch on that the other day?

 

If we're quoting scripture to back up an arguement, we can quote from the scriptural resource we choose. That's sort of why it's usually a fairly decent idea to keep scripture out of arguments that don't pertain to the afterlife, you can always find one source to contradict another.

 

LOL... both of the above are correct. krusty, pm incoming.

 

you mean he would become a child molestor?

Cant really blame someone for being a pedophile, its a psychological disorder. Theres a ton of pedophiles who hate being attracted to little kids, but dont really have a choice in the matter. Its the pedophiles that become child molestors that are pretty bad people. I hate child molestors, but i sympathize with pedophiles. Sorry, just something ive always been very picky about.

 

well that's fine, a pedo is someone who just thinks about molesting children, and a child molestor actually does it.

still, something has to be done with those pepole, because someone sitting there CONSTANTLY thinking about molesting children(i say constantly, because, as a guy, if you were attracted to someone, but couldn't have them, but had to see them everyday, you'd be constantly thinking abuot them, especially if you never were satisfied, right? i think about sex pretty constantly myself still and i get some, u?) they're just an open opprotunity from doing it. and we've both heard how it's uncurable, right? How long do these people hold out from molesting? As long as their sanity is with them? Seem like their sanity is gone already.

it's like someone who thinks about murdering people everyday, but who can never be cured of the thoughts and wanting to do it. Do we really need those people around? How close are they to crossing that line? I'm an atheist, but i'm not a pacifist when it comes to protecting our offspring, and the future of the species.

i feel like i gotta throw out that spock line, "the needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few"

 

I did mean to critize our legal system with that statement, but it's two sided. While our legal system is agruably the best in the world, it still isn't perfect. Just look at how often people get off for something by hiring a high power lawyer (OJ?).

It is impossible to have a "perfect" legal system. I was trying to imply that if our legal system was "perfect," then I'd be all for the death penalty, but it's not.

 

From the US Dept of Justice data :
Of the 7,061 people under sentence of death between 1977 and 2003, 12% were executed, 4% died by causes other than execution, and 36% received other dispositions.

 

That is a horrible example, we're not talking about following the leader, we're talking about executing someone for their horrible crimes.

Do I support the death penalty? Absolutely, if the crime fits the bill and it is proven without doubt that they did the crime, they should be sentenced. If there is doubt that the person did what he was punished for then continue to fight for that evidence that may get an innocent man off.

As far as economics go, it makes more sense to have the death penalty for inmates with no chance of parole and have committed horrible crimes. It's either that or the prisons continue to get more and more crouded and costs much more money for the taxpayers.

 

I am saying murder is wrong, and it seems you agree. Well we tell kids all the time that two wrongs don't make a right. I'm just showing what damned hypocrites we are as a society.

 

no crime is "without a doubt" that doesn't have video tape evidence and the murderer admiting that he did it. Should we reserve the death penalty for those extreme cases?

people even admitting to crimes, doesn't prove they did it. They can claim duress or mistreatment, or they were covering for someone else.

 

You're right, it's not perfect, and no system is perfect, but ours is absolutely the best on the planet. The idea of our system is that it is better that 10 guilty "get off" to avoid 1 innocent person get convicted. That's why it's tilted in the favor of the accused, and I'm ok with that.